Queen Lolo
May 11, 2005
I’m blogging on a blog, here… Namely “Tears of the Refugee” by Charles who writes here under “Phantom City.” The interesting comments in his wonderful blog entry raise an issue that has confused me from my very first contact with the SGI… (Hope you don’t mind me quoting you, Charles…)
Charles wrote: “As you notice, there has been subtle effort to de-emphasize the historical Buddha and insert Nichiren as the "true Buddha." Discussion of the life, times, and various teachings and sutras of Shakyamuni is not encouraged... I have long thought that in the SGI, the study should be completely revised. It seems to me that the basics of Shakyamuni's Buddhism should be taught like the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold path. Ask 10 SGI leaders what are the Four Noble Truths and Eightfold Path, and I assure you that they will not get it right - some won't know any of it.”
Once again, a blog on this site has helped solidify a cloudy question that’s been floating around in my mind… “Where’s the “Buddhism” in Nichiren Buddhism as presented by the SGI?”
I’m not asking this with a critical tone, but rather with genuine curiousity and an inquiring mind. I am hoping all of you out there, who probably know far more than I about Nichiren Buddhism, can help me decipher what’s really shakin’ in the world of those who follow the Daishonin. I am hoping that some of you who are involved in the SGI, or who used to be involved, can shed some light on this for me here. I’m hoping that those of you who practice Nichiren Buddhism outside the SGI can enlighten me, too.
The fact is, the original Buddha is rarely mentioned at an SGI meeting, except in passing during the “Explanation of the Practice.” Nichiren is quoted. President Ikeda is quoted. Sometimes senior SGI leaders are quoted. But our Main Man, the former Gautama Siddhartha, rarely makes the cut. Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems that if we’re practicing BUDDHISM, the teachings of Buddha should be the main emphasis. They clearly were for Nichiren Daishonon, or he would have called himself something other than a “Buddhist” and he would have promoted something other than the Buddha’s “Lotus Sutra.”
In my first blog on this site, I wrote that in all my exposure to Nichiren Buddhism, “Nowhere can I find anything mentioned about the Four Nobel Truths, or the Eightfold Path, or meditation. (I was even told "Nichiren Buddhists don't display statues of Shakamuni because he was "the wrong Buddha.") Nowhere can I find anything about non-attachment or meditation or any of the basics, all aspects of Buddhism I continue to work with on my own. Has the baby been thrown out with the bathwater?”
Now I’ll admit that most of my knowledge of Nichiren Buddhism has come through the SGI. And I’ll confess that I actually do like the practice they taught me. I like chanting. I like how it puts me in rhythm with something deep within myself and something vast outside myself. I like the way it really works. But maybe it should be called something other than “Buddhism.” Other traditions and other Buddhist teachers translate and re-package and update the teachings of the Buddha, but they all remain true to their original source. The Dalai Lama doesn’t ask us to have faith in the Dalai Lama. He asks us to practice Buddha dharma.
I guess the bottomline question for me is: Is “Buddhism” as taught by the SGI really “Buddhism?” And if so, how?
Posted by at August 12, 2007 04:38 AM